Determination of Inter-Rater Reliability in Pediatric Burn Scar Assessment Using a Modified Version of the Vancouver Scar Scale
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Vancouver Scar Scale is too subjective for our needs and is not culturally sensitive to our Aboriginal clients. The VSS was modified by developing a color scale to aid with vascularity rating. This study was designed to measure the inter-rater reliability of the modified Vancouver Scar Scale (MVSS). Three raters assessed 14 pediatric patients, resulting in a total of 32 scars. Data were analyzed using a Spearman Rank Order Correlation, intraclass correlation coefficient, and the kappa statistic. All subtests were shown to have significant (P < .05) correlations except for the pigmentation subtest. Because the pigmentation subtest has poor reliability, its inclusion in scar assessment should be questioned. Results indicate that only total scores of the MVSS should be used when determining burn scar outcomes because individual subtest scores appear to have little reliability. Further modifications to the MVSS followed by additional research with greater numbers of subjects are warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it